First, many people that argue against using DUE theory of any kind feel it does harm. That is one of the reasons they fight so adamantly against it. Even though using total random theory for the basis of the same strategy comes to the same result, they insist that by using a calculation method (due theory) you harm participants because they feel it misleads them and corrupts their thinking. Second, I have no problem with criticism of any kind. I do expect it and especially expect it when using a calculation process. It only becomes an issue when (a) the same argument is repeated time and time again. We get it, now move on. (b) when the only argument they can come up with is to argue the basis for doing something and not the something itself. If there is a problem with the WHY then say it once and be done. If there is a problem with the WHAT then we have a discussion that actually can accomplish something. When I discuss a strategy that involves TIMING of a bet based on rolls, I get that the TIMING is DUE THEORY and many don't agree with that. That part is the WHY of the strategy. Then the bets themselves are the WHAT of the strategy. Place this, Buy that, Lay this, Hard Way there. It would be nice if players accepted that the WHY is only important to the player and the WHAT is the part that should have the majority of the attention. The actual bets or strategy are the WHAT. I love when I tell someone that I will bet the Don't Come until I have 2-3 bets on points, then periodically I throw down a Lay Bet on something. Now, this is not a bad strategy, different from some but similar to others. The problem comes when asked WHY I decided to make the lay bet when I did. I simply chose to make it because the average roll was 7 and this shooter rolled 9 times. For me, the 7 hitting is closer to 1 than 0 on the scale of probability. I may win or I may lose, but the fact is, the strategy happened regardless of rolls, the timing of the strategy is because of rolls. Each player will decide a moment to place any particular bet they want to bet. That is a personal decision that the player must be comfortable with. That decision is the WHY for every player. For some it is TIMING, others table feel, others, actions around them, other ETC. No real discussion will happen if players are only arguing about the why on when a player bets. Get to the heart of it and discuss the actual betting and strategy. (oh I forgot, if we do that, there is nothing to discuss since all bets are negative expectation and anyone who thinks differently is living with a fallacy of their own.) last, just as others have a right to criticize posts, those criticized have a right to criticize the criticism. Yes, I will post, and yes you will stand up shouting about how bad it is..... Now I will shout back that you have no real valuable critique. Funny though that you feel I should accept it instead of commenting back.... works both ways I think.